LIST OF PANELS

How do the consequences of a policy become a source of another social problem? This inquiry has been enduring in the social sciences, forming a long line of research. In an idealized version of the policy process, policies are typically regarded as a solution purposefully designed to address social problems or benefit certain groups without harming others. However, policies oftentimes become a source of new problems, unintentionally or even intentionally. This paradox is so common that we can find rich examples: e.g., stricter policy enforcement that increases social disparities in the justice system, raising the minimum wage increasing unemployment, and increasing the legal drinking age leading to riskier alcohol consumption.

Side effects of government measures are not a novel occurrence; social science scholars have long recognized this problem. For example, Robert K. Merton in 1936 and Aaron Wildavsky in 1980 already pointed to the problems of policy side effects (labeled as unintended/unanticipated consequences). Economic and policy analysis studies have developed sophisticated tools for assessing policy trade-offs, which are widely used in policymaking practice today, including cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis, to quantify policy side effects as costs and build a common ground to control the costs with respect to the benefits. In political science, policy feedback theory explains how policies intentionally or unintentionally shape politics and structure political behaviors and decisions.

However, these early insights have yet to be incorporated into public policy scholarship to address practical challenges in dealing with policy side effects. This gap becomes especially evident in responses to national emergencies—such as the COVID-19 pandemic, financial crises, and natural disasters—where governments implement strong, wide-reaching policies that significantly impact people and society across various dimensions. How do public policies become a source of social problems?

Recognizing this gap in the policy literature, this panel opens an academic discussion on policy side effects by calling for papers that theoretically or empirically investigate issues of policy side effects. Example questions of interest may include, but are not limited to:

-          What are predictable policy side effects and how can we better anticipate them?

-          How and when do policies produce side effects?

-          What are the social and political ramifications of policy side effects?

-          Are policy side effects socially constructed?

-          What are the types of moral dilemmas in implementing policies with expected side effects?

Call for papers (from 300 to 500 words)*

This panel invites a wide variety of papers that theoretically or empirically discuss policy consequences under the umbrella of policy side effects. The themes include empirical assessments of unintended consequences of public policy, including health, political, and social ramifications; theoretical frameworks and typologies that help reveal patterns or unpack the variety of policy side effects; practical recommendations for minimizing or monitoring policy side effects; and novel methods for assessing policy side effects. We are particularly interested in topics that discuss the following issues:

-          policy consequences that, whether intentionally or unintentionally, undermine the stability of existing institutions or social norms, such as the health care system, the economy, the education system, culture, and social interactions; and

-          qualitative research that deals with policymakers’ behaviors, debates among stakeholders, and moral dilemmas in the decision-making process when side effects are expected.